About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18
, as of right now china owns $1.15 trillion of our debt. then, number two on the list, is japan with $1.13 trillion of our debt. now, this is interesting. out of this debt number three on the list is opec. opec is an entity. that's the countries of ecuador and venezuela and india and bahrain and iran and iraq and kuwait and amman and qatar and saudi arabia and the u.a.e., algeria, ga been a, -- gabon, nigeria. they're now number three on the list and they own $267 billion of our debt. brazil comes in at number four, $250.5 billion. and then number five on the list, new to the list, the top five list, the caribbean banking centers. now own $240.4 billion of u.s. debt. by the way, caribbean banking centers are the bahamas, bermuda, cayman islands, netherlands and panama. this is who owns us. this is who owns our debt. and this is why on this side of the aisle, what we continue to say is the spending has to be dealt with. we have seen -- we've heard from everybody. we are hearing from economists all around the globe. and they repeatedly say what we are saying, what we've been saying for ye
to pyongyang. press articles hail the fact that china in anticipation of the recent launch had begun inspecting cargo on north korean ships in search of contraband. the question this raises is why has chi gnat not been inspecting north korean ships since 2006 as called for in a u.n. resolution, reinforced by another resolution in 2009. if u.n. member states would only enforce the sanctions currently on the books, north korea would be unable to ignore the swer national community and the civilized world. the time for coordinated international action is now. the time, in fact, is long overdue. with that, mr. speakering i reserve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the squom from florida reserves. the gentleman from california, mr. berman is recognized. mr. berman: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of h.con.res. 145 as amended and yield myself such time as i may consume. sproy the gentleman is recognized. mr. berman: i would like to thank the sponsor of this legislation, ms. ros-lehtinen, for her leadership on this issue and her work in addressing the north korean threa
vacuum cleaner. sucking into the united states the net exports of europe, japan, and lately china. thus providing exporters -- germany, japan, or china -- with the requisite demand necessary. to keep the factories going. so, the ever expanding trade deficit was not an accident. it was a very clever way of replacing one that surplus recycling system with another. the first one, it was one where america had a surplus and america decided instead of doing what germany is doing at the moment -- which is cutting its nose to spite its face, and thereby entering into recession by cutting, cutting, cutting -- volcker and kissinger initially, and then volcker as the head of the fed had a different idea. we are going to expand our dominance and our wealth by expanding our deficit and using our deficits to provide the rest of the world with the demand which is necessary to grow their economies, even at the expense of ours. and who is going to pay for the deficit? if i have an ever-expanding deficit, the bank tells me it is game over. but if you are the united states of america and you have the rese
with this, the british, the french, the germans, russia, china, they all tend to view this as a proliferation problem. the conversation between iran and the other side tends to be about that issue, very narrowly focused. to kind of move that conversation, you have to figure out a different kind of architecture. the five plus one process, as such, is designed to deal with the corporation issue and the composition is that has to do with the iranian violation of the mpt and there have been 62 -- six security council resolutions that suggests sanctions. there are two countries who suggest that the issue between -- that this is not a proliferation issue but has to do with the character of the regime and one of them is israel who does not view this as strictly an arms dispute and the second one is iran who similarly suggests that although it is an arms control issue, they are really using arms control as a way to undermine the regime. there are two actors in this particular conflagration who are not accepting the argument being that this is about nuclear infractions as oppo
. but competitors in china are, rush show were trading on a daily basis. -- my competitors in china and russia work training. this is a position of irritation of a triple jump. i was like a robot in the sense that everything i was doing, the hours i was putting in it, the morning, the afternoon, the evening, i trained all they basically. my first session, 10:00, i was basically of the rank by nine and my last session would be at 6:00-6:30. then i would go to the gym. i look back, no wonder i was in really good shape. >> where did that drive? how did that drive? where do you get that drive? >> we were talking earlier about the role of parents. when you had mentioned the tiger mom or the tiger parents, we did not have tiger parents. they were there to support me and be there in times when i needed a push culminated motivation. it is just one of those things when you have a passion and a vision. you do not see anything else. that is what drives you every day. >> you just got engaged. are you going to be a tiger mom. [laughter] >> looking at the way i was raised with a set of rules and just the way my
. the first one will be immigration. we agreed and a lot of people say how are we going to compete with china and we can have the entire world at our disposal. under which the best people in the world can come to the u.s. and start businesses. >> then we have to focus on a special in the corporate tax reform to get the system which is simpler and promotes efficiency and these are for american businesses. then we have to and that will -- efficiency will be enormous. the next is an infrastructure investment to be made. in the context of the budget deal we are getting where we will spend less going forward. we have to think about what our values are and the most important things we can spend money are on infrastructure to make investments in the future rather than have short-term spending. and twin that with support for research, basic research and higher education and for education. if government does that and create some certainty, tell us what it will be. with respect to health care costs and energy costs. and then i think it will create the conditions under which businesses will be able to c
even have to consider borrowing money from china or anywhere else and we're worried about a a.a.a. credit rating. why should we even have that as an option? we're the richest country in the world, and we put food out everywhere. also, one brief note on the gun laws issue. they're not going to ban a particular type of car because it drove through a crowd. so i don't see how they can target any particular weapon and say it's worse than another. combat loading weapon, you can almost do that as fast as you can pull the trigger also. so it's not a matter of how many rounds you can shoot. it's a matter of an insane person getting a hold of anything -- a knife, a car, anything. so -- guest: keith, and the reality of using guns for whatever illegal purposes oftentimes gets lost into washington, d.c. and the politics. boy, we're going to have to do something. we are going to have a press release, a press conference. there is a second amendment. thankfully the supreme court has recognized it is an individual right and a narrow decision. the one thing i want to go back, small business th
, close to china, or is it just for the 50 states. guest: a really good question they apply to of the federated territories as well and for some of the grant programs there are statutory minimum amounts that have to be provided for the different territories. join the conversation and talked to david maurer about a homeland security grants to states, here are the numbers to call. what formula did the grant programs follow went looking to get out the money? what do they have to do? guest: it varies from program to program, but generally speaking, as a first cut, dhs takes into consideration the risk. in other words, it wants to provide the money more toward portions of the country where there is a greater risk of attack or natural disaster. secondly, we look at capabilities. how capable are the state and local governments already. those that are less capable should get additional funding. and third, they look of the types of project that they are applying for. one of the interesting thing about the third step isthe state and local governments do not apply untypically for speci
a tiny fraction of this to deal with china or russia t our nuclear arsenal isn't stopping iran from trying to achieve its nuclear weapon. these are sad, missed opportunities to right size the military which will still be the most powerful in the world by far. for us to deal with veterans' needs. mr. mcgovern: additional one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. blumenauer: for us to deal with the threats that we face today, to deal with the damage that we have done in the misguided war in iraq. to be able to deal meaningfully with the guard and ready reserve that should be upgraded and healed from the damage that was inflicted upon him. we can provide far more real security, save tax dollars, deal with the needs of veterans that are about to be, sadly, undercut , and provide balance to our budget. because, in fact, the fiscal instability for reckless -- from reckless bills like that is in fact a national security threat. we are no longer going to be able to pay almost half the world's entire military budget. we should start by rejecting this authorization
is broke. china owns us and we are sending our young men and our money to afghanistan and we're going to cut programs right here in america for the american people. . the american people need to put the pressure on congress to bring our troops home now and not wait until december of 2014. mr. speaker, i assure you if we start bringing them home in december of 2014, it will become 2015 and it will become 2016 and how many more families have to cry about their loved ones being killed in a war that has no end to it? mr. speaker, today i would like to submit for the record, i will ask unanimous consent the names of 28 american service members who have been killed in the last few weeks. thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, again i ask the people to look at this poster and realize that this war is costing us in so many, many ways. the most important our young men and women who are dying. if you agree with me that we need to bring our troops home before the current december 2014 deadline, please go to www.bringthemhome201.com, and sign the petition. mr. speaker, i have been to walter reed an
he came from, back to china, but his home country, our good old buddies, the chinese, refused to take him back. they didn't want him, and so they stalled and stalled and stalled, and over those three years of chinese stalling and gave him the run-around, chen was eventually free and free to kill and kill he did. mr. speaker, this tragedy is not an isolated phenomena. flafflet, other americans have died as a result -- unfortunately, other americans have died as a result of a gaping hole in the immigration system. it's no secret that everybody believes our immigration system is broken. fixing it down the road will be complex and complicated, but there's some things we can do about immigration right now to fix specific problems and here's one of these. currently, mr. speaker, thousands of criminal aliens are in our country, just like chen, that have committed a crime, gone to prison, our immigration worked to order them deported but their country won't take them back. they refuse to do so, so those countries stall and delay and eventually never take back their outlaws. so by law when the
. host: the stories are "the in- sourcing boom" and "mr. china comes to america. both can be found at theatlantic.com. thanks for joining us. we will take you live to the house floor. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., december 19, 2012. i hereby appoint the honorable daniel webster to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has agreed to s. res. 624, relative to the death of the honorable daniel k. inouye, senator from the state of ohio. -- hawaii. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of
china is a big user. it is like any commodity. host: mr. sieminski, what are the major renewable energy source available to be developed in the eastern u.s., and how do we get them to get started? guest: the eastern united states energy resources, in the east coast of the u.s., we now have discovered there is a lot of natural gas. it basically starts in west virginia and runs up into pennsylvania and up into new york state. if we go back the last 100 years, pennsylvania and west virginia have been big producers of coal in the u.s. the oil industry started, the first well was drilled in pennsylvania back in 1859. the wind resources along the east coast, are being developed as well pro. probably the most exciting thing being developed in the east coast is a possibility there --uld b host: on the same question of what is out there, what is the u.s. energy independence status if all the offshore oil and anwar are included? guest: it goes to the answer that frank gave. all of the oil in the united states does not belong to the federal government. oil offshore generally falls under the federa
want to start off with 9/11, syria, china and the 20 children. three examples, 9/11, syria, people assassinated. i need to understand why you diminished someone's comments with regard to the second amendment and the purpose of that. you have a master's degree. i don't understand. that said rather than being critical. the reality is horrible situation that happened. i don't defend anything that happened at the school, but that said, the individual going into a school with a shotgun, that said we could come back to the 1994 democratic vote. senator feinstein introduced the bill and you guys lost although h lost. i'll stop right there. those are three examples and i invite the listeners to look at the china situation in less than a week ago where ears, arms and fingers were cut off. what say you. guest: we do live in a society where we do feel protected and represented in government. i think that is something that maybe has diminished in the sense of the governments there. we do have a representative democracy and something we should be very, very proud of. and compare us to countries
is the head line at "the washington post" fed page. josh hicks reports -- guest: i just got back from china, and we talked about the electoral college there, and a state that have a problem with freedom, you know, and democracy. they can't figure it out. i tried to explain to them and they still wonder why do we still have this if we were this representative democracy and the people have their way. very interesting. host: how did you answer the question? guest: i tried to explain the foundation. the fact we have federalism and states have power and in this particular case it is the power to select a president. they did not want congress to do it. but they still cannot buy it, i don't think. host: on twitter -- asking to explain the historical justification and why do we need it now. guest: the justification for it at the founding was they did not want congress to make the selection of the president. they wanted to take away from the capital where maybe chicanery would occur and people would do deals. they wanted it to respect federalism, a federal election rather than a national legend. it
plan b. plan b is not the way to go unless we are trying to get in second place to countries like china and others. if we want to stay in the lead, we need to get our fiscal house in order and reject this plan b. the speaker pro tempore: all time on the democratic side has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin has two minutes remaining. mr. ryan: mr. speaker, let's take a step back and remind us where we are. on january 1, if we do nothing, every american taxpayer will see a massive tax increase. that will dramatically hurt our economy and families. the next day, we'll face a 10% cut in our defense budget. americans chose divided government. whether it was intended or not. the president won. the house is still a republican house. we are going to have to find a way to make this work. this is what we are intending on doing today. we want to avert this crisis, this cliff. but that means beginning to get spending under control. that means to prevent as many tax increases hitting as many americans as possible. i mean this sincerely, my friend from maryland says we need a balanced approach. t
canceling each other out. how the president -- whoever the president might be -- do anything? you have china -- finding it impossible to provide a replacement for the demand that the west has done away with. so, i do not have an answer for your question. bewilderment. >> my question is about consumer demand and the extent to which the old system depended on it. if we do not have it to the same degree, could there possibly be a new economy? i cannot know how to say all of these in the right economic terms. i will say what i am thinking and see what you make out of it. its teams like all the economy's got to a point where it had to be based on growth. it could not just be sustainable. it had to grow. and that meant more consumers. so, then, that led to a lot of things ecologically that were not good for the earth's, things that people did to maximize profits. so, that is one thing. is there the possibility there might be a new economy that is not based on growth? second, if you do not have consumer demand at the same level that he used to -- and of course, i think that is why. one of the piece
not had -- food cards. stamps.t had food since china and russia when to communism because of starvation, it would be best to keep people do not have much money. one of the questions that i wanted to guess is you're not given any costs or payments -- let's see a mother or a child on food cards. how much per month do they get? according to my computer, they would not get enough to eat very well. host: thank you. guest: so, for a family of four, let's say, two adults, two children, the maximum benefit for a family of four would be $670 per month. it is in low-cost diet. that is why we likely see a lot of use of these programs along with other assistance. the caller is right that it is not the supplemental nutrition assistance program -- now the supplemental nutrition assistance program, but these are electronic benefitcards. host: as you deal with these issues, you also deal with obesity because often these families are eating less than healthy food or fast food. guest: that is true. it is complicating when you try to talk about them together. it is important that you remember that many of
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18